Let's Talk Headphones IV: Should I get Beats? Do I need Noise Cancelling?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Let's Talk Headphones IV: Should I get Beats? Do I need Noise Cancelling?

«‹›405 »

Godzilla07: Oct 4, 2008

double-postin' for the audio nerds in here

Sennheiser is about to launch a new headphone: the HD660S2.

# ? Jan 28, 2023 22:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 06:42

Social Animal: Nov 1, 2005

Got my DT770 Pro, love it. Feels like there's less bass than my JVC headphone but the... clarity? Not sure the right words to use but it sounds clearer, like I can pick up small details much better. Also I don't think I notice any differences with using the Apple dongle but I'll keep it since it lets me plug into the back of the PC and keep the wire away from me. Thanks guys I'm happy.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 03:02

The Perfect Element: Dec 5, 2005; "This is a bit of a... a poof song"

For casual listening at home, listening to master quality tidal tracks on my phone, am I likely to hear a significant difference between my XM4s and wired open back headphones of roughly the same price?

I see you guys writing so passionately about headphones, but I have no real way of telling whether I'm missing out on an entire world of amazing sound quality, or whether I'd buy something extravagant and instantly just say 'eh.'

# ? Jan 31, 2023 09:48

evobatman: Jul 30, 2006; it means nothing, but says everything!; Pillbug

Those master quality tracks are first sent to your XM4s with a lossy codec, and then decoded by the DAC inside the headphones befor the signal is heavily shaped by signal processing to sound good with the noise cancelling, the amplifiers and drivers in them. From a technical standpoint, the master file in Tidal and the sound playing in your XM4s are two completely different things. From an experience standpoint... eh, it's good enough. The difference you're asking about would be a difference between the construction and signature of the headphones, and very little when it comes to the source. I have a bunch of high-end stuff, including the Sennheiser HD800S and HDVD 800 amp, and chasing that ultimate sound quality is more of a fun technical exercise than about experienced quality. I also have a ton of cheaper, older headphones that sound more musical and fun. If I put the HD800S on your head, you'd go "That's pretty good", whereas an iPod Classic and a pair of BLON BL03 would make you go "holy poo poo, I had no idea it could sound like that!"

# ? Jan 31, 2023 10:01

Godzilla07: Oct 4, 2008

The Perfect Element posted:

For casual listening at home, listening to master quality tidal tracks on my phone, am I likely to hear a significant difference between my XM4s and wired open back headphones of roughly the same price?

I see you guys writing so passionately about headphones, but I have no real way of telling whether I'm missing out on an entire world of amazing sound quality, or whether I'd buy something extravagant and instantly just say 'eh.'

You'd be able to hear a significant positive difference between say, a Sennheiser HD560S, which is half the cost of the Sony XM4 over-ears, and the XM4s.

There's two parts to sound quality: tuning, and technical performance. The HD560S has much better tuning than the XM4s. I find the bass so overpowering on the Sonys that it ruins how vocals and guitars sound. The HD560S also has better technical performance than the XM4s. By technical performance, there's more detail, a wider soundstage (how wide music appears to hear when you're listening to a headphone), and better imaging (being able to pick out the locations of musicians in a recording more clearly.)

Tuning makes a far bigger difference than technical performance. I'd rather listen to the Truthear Zero, a $50 IEM over the $1200 Audeze LCD-X without EQ.

But sound quality isn't always everything. Open-back headphones aren't very useful if your neighbor has a yappy dog, or is running a goddamn leaf blower. Open-back headphones generally require EQ to deliver the bass impact that most people like in a headphone, and EQ may not always be possible in a given setup. My AirPods Pro still get a lot of usage because they sound good enough and they're very convenient.

Since you're here and wondering about better sound quality, try installing an EQ app and applying this EQ preset to your XM3s. The linked preset changes the tuning of the XM4 to the Harman over-ear target, which was designed as a preference target for what most people will like in a headphone. You'll need an EQ app for this preset because they provide a lot more control over a traditional EQ, like the EQ you find in your Sony headphones app. Equalizer APO and Peace for Windows, SoundSource for Mac, and Wavelet for Android will do the job. If you're on iOS you're SOL for software EQ. This is also a lot cheaper than buying new headphones. The preset also allows you to customize certain bands, so if you want more or less bass, adjust the gain (dB level) of band 1.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 15:14

The Perfect Element: Dec 5, 2005; "This is a bit of a... a poof song"

Godzilla07 posted:

You'd be able to hear a significant positive difference between say, a Sennheiser HD560S, which is half the cost of the Sony XM4 over-ears, and the XM4s.

There's two parts to sound quality: tuning, and technical performance. The HD560S has much better tuning than the XM4s. I find the bass so overpowering on the Sonys that it ruins how vocals and guitars sound. The HD560S also has better technical performance than the XM4s. By technical performance, there's more detail, a wider soundstage (how wide music appears to hear when you're listening to a headphone), and better imaging (being able to pick out the locations of musicians in a recording more clearly.)

Tuning makes a far bigger difference than technical performance. I'd rather listen to the Truthear Zero, a $50 IEM over the $1200 Audeze LCD-X without EQ.

But sound quality isn't always everything. Open-back headphones aren't very useful if your neighbor has a yappy dog, or is running a goddamn leaf blower. Open-back headphones generally require EQ to deliver the bass impact that most people like in a headphone, and EQ may not always be possible in a given setup. My AirPods Pro still get a lot of usage because they sound good enough and they're very convenient.

Since you're here and wondering about better sound quality, try installing an EQ app and applying this EQ preset to your XM3s. The linked preset changes the tuning of the XM4 to the Harman over-ear target, which was designed as a preference target for what most people will like in a headphone. You'll need an EQ app for this preset because they provide a lot more control over a traditional EQ, like the EQ you find in your Sony headphones app. Equalizer APO and Peace for Windows, SoundSource for Mac, and Wavelet for Android will do the job. If you're on iOS you're SOL for software EQ. This is also a lot cheaper than buying new headphones. The preset also allows you to customize certain bands, so if you want more or less bass, adjust the gain (dB level) of band 1.

Thanks very much for this. I downloaded the Wavelet app (but have had to put it in 'legacy mode' as it won't work with Tidal otherwise), and have set it to the wh1000-xm4 pre set.

Maybe my ears are broken, but I think I prefer standard xm4 sound. there's definitely greater clarity using the EQ , but its at the expense of a lot of 'oomph'. Even with 'bass boost' on, it still basically sounds tinny to me. It would be cool if other xm4 users gave it a try and posted their thoughts!

I don't know where to begin with the file you linked tbh. Feel like I need a degree to understand it - thank you though!

# ? Jan 31, 2023 16:15

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Just Kramering into this thread to post that MQA is worse than normal CD redbook from a fidelity perspective, the whole effort is a scam to generate license fees and you should avoid it [not always possible on Tidal, sadly]

# ? Jan 31, 2023 17:13

Dr. Fishopolis: Aug 31, 2004; ROBOT

The Perfect Element posted:

For casual listening at home, listening to master quality tidal tracks on my phone, am I likely to hear a significant difference between my XM4s and wired open back headphones of roughly the same price?

Yes, very much so, and EQing your XM4s is not going to get you anywhere near the same experience lol.

Also, Tidal is kind of a scam. It's not worse than something like Spotify, but it's not better either despite their claims.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 17:41

Mr. Mercury: Aug 13, 2021

The Perfect Element posted:

Thanks very much for this. I downloaded the Wavelet app (but have had to put it in 'legacy mode' as it won't work with Tidal otherwise), and have set it to the wh1000-xm4 pre set.

Maybe my ears are broken, but I think I prefer standard xm4 sound. there's definitely greater clarity using the EQ , but its at the expense of a lot of 'oomph'. Even with 'bass boost' on, it still basically sounds tinny to me. It would be cool if other xm4 users gave it a try and posted their thoughts!

I don't know where to begin with the file you linked tbh. Feel like I need a degree to understand it - thank you though!

wavelet also has some pretty basic limitations as well, as there's only so much dynamic range to play with over BT. If you make cuts or boosts too aggressively you'll hear the drop in quality. Normally it's fine, but as these profiles are based on measurements and not "what's the least bad way to do this" sometimes the presets will introduce wonkiness.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 18:57

The Perfect Element: Dec 5, 2005; "This is a bit of a... a poof song"

qirex posted:

Just Kramering into this thread to post that MQA is worse than normal CD redbook from a fidelity perspective, the whole effort is a scam to generate license fees and you should avoid it [not always possible on Tidal, sadly]

drat, that sucks. I just dropped £20 for a subscription as well! I was using Amazon HD but the app was so janky and unreliable that I just couldn't continue with it any more. What's the best high quality music streaming service? Quboz?

# ? Jan 31, 2023 19:48

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

The Perfect Element posted:

drat, that sucks. I just dropped £20 for a subscription as well! I was using Amazon HD but the app was so janky and unreliable that I just couldn't continue with it any more. What's the best high quality music streaming service? Quboz?

I put up with Tidal otherwise, it works perfectly with my Roon and Sonos setups and the discovery features are good. Since I mostly have streaming to find new music the imperceptible quality hit when getting 16/44 MQA instead of FLAC isn't something I'm concerned about. Mildly spicy take: you can't hear high resolution anyway, don't pay extra for it.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 19:53

Dr. Fishopolis: Aug 31, 2004; ROBOT

The Perfect Element posted:

drat, that sucks. I just dropped £20 for a subscription as well! I was using Amazon HD but the app was so janky and unreliable that I just couldn't continue with it any more. What's the best high quality music streaming service? Quboz?

you're not going to hear a difference with a fancy music service, just use spotify or google or whatever's cheapest / most convenient.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 20:01

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I can generally hear the difference between Spotify [192 AAC or ogg I think] and CD quality of the same track but it�s highly music dependent. If you�re a careful listener with good equipment getting a CD quality service is worth it, IMO.

# ? Jan 31, 2023 22:57

Godzilla07: Oct 4, 2008

The Perfect Element posted:

Thanks very much for this. I downloaded the Wavelet app (but have had to put it in 'legacy mode' as it won't work with Tidal otherwise), and have set it to the wh1000-xm4 pre set.

Maybe my ears are broken, but I think I prefer standard xm4 sound. there's definitely greater clarity using the EQ , but its at the expense of a lot of 'oomph'. Even with 'bass boost' on, it still basically sounds tinny to me. It would be cool if other xm4 users gave it a try and posted their thoughts!

I don't know where to begin with the file you linked tbh. Feel like I need a degree to understand it - thank you though!

I don't really trust the AutoEQ presets, because they normalize a headphone's measured frequency response to a target curve, usually a Harman curve, but without anyone having listened to the headphone after it was normalized. None of the AutoEQ presets I've listened to have really sounded good. The guy that creates the linked presets does listen to the headphone to help dial in the preset.

To use that linked preset, go to this link, switch over to the equalizer tab and punch in the following values.

Hit the Export Graphic EQ (for Wavelet) button, and import the preset into Wavelet by following the video from the linked timestamp:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpQalW_bjLQ&t=410s

You might be a listener who prefers more bass than the Harman target. Harman's research found that overall, 65% of listeners preferred the +5 dB Harman bass shelf for over-ear headphones, 10% of listeners and 18% of men preferred 4-6 dB more bass than the Harman target, and 25% of listeners preferred 2 dB less bass than the Harman target prescribes. JBL, a Harman company, generally tunes their headphones to Harman but with more bass to target younger male listeners.

To accommodate for this, you can play around and adjust the preset to +10 dB, or +12 dB at the 105 Hz low-shelf filter. You could also just be so used to the sound of the Sonys that the EQ'd Sonys sounds weirder; give it a few days on the EQ preset and come back to the stock Sony sound and see how you feel.

Headphones that are well-tuned from the factory don't require this heavy of a hand in EQ. For most of my headphones, I just EQ in a bass boost and don't touch the mids and treble.

qirex posted:

I can generally hear the difference between Spotify [192 AAC or ogg I think] and CD quality of the same track but it�s highly music dependent. If you�re a careful listener with good equipment getting a CD quality service is worth it, IMO.

This may be a Spotify issue more than anything else, with whatever compression and loudness adjustments they apply to tracks. Whatever differences exist between 256 AAC on Apple Music and lossless are so small that I just have it on AAC to save bandwidth and data since I'm generally using either Bluetooth or AirPlay 2 with AM anyways.

# ? Feb 1, 2023 00:27

Dr. Fishopolis: Aug 31, 2004; ROBOT

qirex posted:

If you�re a careful listener with good equipment getting a CD quality service is worth it, IMO.

well the person i quoted is listening with consumer bluetooth cans, but even still I'd encourage anyone to try an ABX test before continuing to spend money on these services.

# ? Feb 1, 2023 18:14

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

well the person i quoted is listening with consumer bluetooth cans, but even still I'd encourage anyone to try an ABX test before continuing to spend money on these services.

All the music streaming services except Spotify offer CD quality at their base price tier. Or are you opposed to the concept overall?

# ? Feb 1, 2023 19:28

njsykora: Jan 23, 2012; Robots confuse squirrels.

qirex posted:

All the music streaming services except Spotify offer CD quality at their base price tier. Or are you opposed to the concept overall?

I think most of the streaming services are 320kbps MP3 at base with CD quality in their "hi-fi" tier. Except Apple Music which has everything in one tier including hi-res lossless.

# ? Feb 1, 2023 20:49

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

njsykora posted:

I think most of the streaming services are 320kbps MP3 at base with CD quality in their "hi-fi" tier. Except Apple Music which has everything in one tier including hi-res lossless.

Or you could check instead of arguing with me, since Apple, Amazon, Tidal, Qobuz and Deezer all have lossless at their basic paid tier. Spotify really is the outlier, at least for the western market.

# ? Feb 1, 2023 21:00

Mr. Mercury: Aug 13, 2021

If I read the original comment correctly�and apologies if I haven't�I think the idea was that the service wasn't the biggest bottleneck in that chain, so it's not as big a deal

# ? Feb 1, 2023 21:08

Dr. Fishopolis: Aug 31, 2004; ROBOT

qirex posted:

All the music streaming services except Spotify offer CD quality at their base price tier. Or are you opposed to the concept overall?

No, I'm saying there's no audible difference between CD quality and a well encoded 320k mp3, so just use whatever service who cares.

# ? Feb 1, 2023 21:25

Veloxyll: May 3, 2011; Fuck you say?!

So, I ripped the audio cable out of my headphones this morning by accident. I have previously tried bluetooth headphones and experienced the FUN of Bluetooth codecs and Windows 10.

If I got a new Windows 11 compatible motherboard and upgraded to that, would that solve matters? Alternatively, are there over-ear headset + microphone combinations that don't do the robot that work with Windows 10.
Lets say for sub-$300 skinny Australian dollars.

# ? Feb 2, 2023 07:13

Sorbus: Apr 1, 2010

I use Qobuz now but I'd say that Tidal is significantly better than Spotify and about the same as qobuz and amazon.

# ? Feb 2, 2023 08:16

The Perfect Element: Dec 5, 2005; "This is a bit of a... a poof song"

So I did some a/b testing on Tidal and Qobuz, and there is a definite difference between how they sound. I don't know if it's possible to define if one is objectively 'better' than the other, but I think Qobuz provides a clearer sound and seems to have a wider soundstage. Again, these are on my xm4s, using ldac and with 990kbps transfer selected.

So, on the basis that Qobuz is just over half the price of Tidal, I guess I'll be sticking with it for the time being. I can imagine at some point I'll get frustrated with its smaller library though.

# ? Feb 2, 2023 09:10

Black Griffon: Mar 12, 2005; Now, in the quantum moment before the closure, when all become one. One moment left. One point of space and time.

I know who you are. You are destiny.

Lol, well, I'm returning my AKG K361. Compared to my trusty old HyperX Cloud II I found the audio to be flat, compressed and it was hard to differentiate between instruments in music and hard to get a good roomy feeling in games. The Cloud II is cheaper and the set I have is older so I don't actually know if I have to go up in price to get a good replacement, but I might have to I reckon.

Kind of a bummer, but at least I'm just out eight bucks in shipping, an annoying back and forth with customer service, and time.

So with all that in mind, any other recommendations? Like I said, I'm willing to go up in price, but I don't want to run into the same issue again. The Cloud II has some deficiencies in terms of clarity and intensity, but it feels like it has a good range and depth and I'm gonna need something with those qualities but better.

# ? Feb 2, 2023 14:52

wolrah: May 8, 2006; what?

Veloxyll posted:

If I got a new Windows 11 compatible motherboard and upgraded to that, would that solve matters? Alternatively, are there over-ear headset + microphone combinations that don't do the robot that work with Windows 10.
Lets say for sub-$300 skinny Australian dollars.

AFAIK Windows 11 doesn't really change Bluetooth in any meaningful way. The codec mess remains the same. It's just as stupid for phones, but there's actual demand for phone vendors to pay to license the common codecs so they can sell some fancy earbuds, where Microsoft has no real reason to pay for that for every Windows user when the vast majority will never even pair up a headset.

# ? Feb 2, 2023 18:42

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

I�ve had my eye on a BTR5 for a while for a portable DAC/amp, and it looks like it�s been replaced by the BTR7.

I�ll mostly be connecting my cans to my work laptop, iPhone, iPad, and Steam Deck � do y�all think there will be any problems with latency or anything like that? The built in mic is a strong pro for Discord calls and the like playing with friends.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 02:46

redeyes: Sep 14, 2002; by Fluffdaddy

NewFatMike posted:

I�ve had my eye on a BTR5 for a while for a portable DAC/amp, and it looks like it�s been replaced by the BTR7.

I�ll mostly be connecting my cans to my work laptop, iPhone, iPad, and Steam Deck � do y�all think there will be any problems with latency or anything like that? The built in mic is a strong pro for Discord calls and the like playing with friends.

Radsone ES100. F those BTR things. I have my reasons but they are solid

# ? Feb 3, 2023 02:57

Godzilla07: Oct 4, 2008

Black Griffon posted:

Lol, well, I'm returning my AKG K361. Compared to my trusty old HyperX Cloud II I found the audio to be flat, compressed and it was hard to differentiate between instruments in music and hard to get a good roomy feeling in games. The Cloud II is cheaper and the set I have is older so I don't actually know if I have to go up in price to get a good replacement, but I might have to I reckon.

Kind of a bummer, but at least I'm just out eight bucks in shipping, an annoying back and forth with customer service, and time.

So with all that in mind, any other recommendations? Like I said, I'm willing to go up in price, but I don't want to run into the same issue again. The Cloud II has some deficiencies in terms of clarity and intensity, but it feels like it has a good range and depth and I'm gonna need something with those qualities but better.

Try the Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro if you've got to have a closed-back headphone. Some say that the headphone the HyperX Cloud II was based on, the Takstar Pro80, was a DT770 clone in the first place.

If you are willing to consider an open-back headphone, the Sennheiser HD560S are fantastic as well.

NewFatMike posted:

I�ve had my eye on a BTR5 for a while for a portable DAC/amp, and it looks like it�s been replaced by the BTR7.

I�ll mostly be connecting my cans to my work laptop, iPhone, iPad, and Steam Deck � do y�all think there will be any problems with latency or anything like that? The built in mic is a strong pro for Discord calls and the like playing with friends.

I adore my Qudelix-5K. It has 10-band parametric EQ, and the ability to drive full-sized headphones that require amplifiers through its additional 2.5mm balanced connection. The Qudelix is regularly in stock again on Amazon with Qudelix themselves as the seller.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 03:15

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

Thanks pals! I think the Qudilex might be the way to go purely because it looks like the Radsone uses micro-USB.

Thanks again, and it�s half the price of the BTR7, which extra owns. It�ll be nice to drive my planar magnetics again since I spilled on my Schiit stack :negative:

# ? Feb 3, 2023 03:53

TenementFunster: Feb 20, 2003; The Cooler King

NewFatMike posted:

Thanks pals! I think the Qudilex might be the way to go purely because it looks like the Radsone uses micro-USB.

Thanks again, and it�s half the price of the BTR7, which extra owns. It�ll be nice to drive my planar magnetics again since I spilled on my Schiit stack

spilled what?

# ? Feb 3, 2023 06:24

Veloxyll: May 3, 2011; Fuck you say?!

wolrah posted:

AFAIK Windows 11 doesn't really change Bluetooth in any meaningful way. The codec mess remains the same. It's just as stupid for phones, but there's actual demand for phone vendors to pay to license the common codecs so they can sell some fancy earbuds, where Microsoft has no real reason to pay for that for every Windows user when the vast majority will never even pair up a headset.

So it's basically a crapshoot for Windows systems and bluetooth? Is Win 11 at least better at letting you control the codec it's using or?

the really anoying thing is that headphones that work on my partner's laptop go to codec hell when on my desktop

Edit: Oh, and are bluetooth headphones that have their own reciever safe from codec hell or?

Additional - I mainly want a half decent headset for gaming + discord chatting

# ? Feb 3, 2023 10:31

wolrah: May 8, 2006; what?

Veloxyll posted:

So it's basically a crapshoot for Windows systems and bluetooth?

More or less, yes.

quote:

Is Win 11 at least better at letting you control the codec it's using or?

I'm not even aware of the Windows BT stack providing a way to *see* what codec is in use, much less control it.

quote:

the really anoying thing is that headphones that work on my partner's laptop go to codec hell when on my desktop

Third-party Bluetooth stacks are still a thing on Windows. An official one wasn't even introduced until XP SP2, by that point multiple vendors had their own things going and Microsoft never made any effort to kill them.

quote:

Edit: Oh, and are bluetooth headphones that have their own reciever safe from codec hell or?

If their bundled transceiver appears as just another USB audio device and manages the Bluetooth aspect entirely internally, it should work the same no matter what you plug it in to. If it exposes itself to the system as a Bluetooth device then you're back in hell.

You aren't going to get APTx or any of the other high end BT codecs unless someone paid for it at both transmitter and receiver sides.

Supposedly the new "LE Audio" standard is going to make better codecs a standard part and maybe solve this mess, but it's been finalized for a while and I don't think I've seen a single device supporting it yet.

edit: well, kinda. There will be a new codec that's better than the baseline SBC codec used in current Bluetooth, but proprietary addons will still be allowed and probably required for the best quality.

https://www.bluetooth.com/media/le-audio/le-audio-faqs/ posted:

LC3 Codec
Q: What is the new audio codec?

A: LE Audio includes a new high-quality, low-power audio codec called LC3, or Low Complexity Communications Codec. Providing high quality even at low data rates, LC3 will bring tremendous flexibility to developers, allowing them to make better design tradeoffs between key product attributes such as audio quality and power consumption.

Q: Can you quantify the expected reduction in power consumption over Classic Audio?

A: Power reductions will depend on implementation and product usage. Listening tests have shown that the LC3 codec can provide higher audio quality than the current SBC codec when operating at that same bit rate (and same power consumption), as well as provide the same, or slightly better, audio quality as SBC at less than half the bit rate (half the power consumption).

As a result, product developers focused on providing the highest audio quality might choose to implement LC3 in a way that would provide higher audio quality than products today but with the same battery life. Other developers focused on battery life might choose to implement the LC3 codec to provide longer battery life � up to double � than products today but deliver the same audio quality. Or they may choose something in between, where the product would provide slightly better audio quality than today as well as up to a 50 percent increase in battery life.

Q: Who is the owner of the LC3 codec IP?

A: While the name �LC3� may be common with other uses outside Bluetooth, the LC3 codec for use within Bluetooth will be specified in a Bluetooth specification. The intention of the Bluetooth SIG is that technology specified in the Bluetooth specifications is covered by the Bluetooth PCLA.

Q: Are other codecs supported, or only LC3?

A: While support for LC3 will be mandatory, LE Audio will allow for the addition of optional codecs as well as the use of custom codecs.

wolrah fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Feb 3, 2023

# ? Feb 3, 2023 15:01

njsykora: Jan 23, 2012; Robots confuse squirrels.

In summary, bluetooth is a nightmare creation and it's a failure of humankind that so much of our poo poo relies on it.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 15:17

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

TenementFunster posted:

spilled what?

An entire pint of beer I had just brought down to my desk. Been a spillboy my whole life.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 16:23

Mr. Mercury: Aug 13, 2021

So you've got a hosed schiit stack?

# ? Feb 3, 2023 16:43

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

It�s a stack of hosed Schiit on top of itself.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 16:44

Mr. Mercury: Aug 13, 2021

Sorry to hear about that man, it sucks big time to have that happen

# ? Feb 3, 2023 17:00

qirex: Feb 15, 2001

I have both the BTR7 and Quedelix. I can't really speak to their power because my headphones aren't super hard to drive but both sound great to me. I have two because I wanted to stop plugging and unplugging the Q5 from my work computer and wanted something with better physical controls. The Q5 is much better for portable use given that it's about 1/3 the size and weight and has a clip but the button situation sucks, they're positioned in such a way that to push one it's very easy to also push the button on the other side of the case. If you're planning to use your source for volume and transport control it's no big thing. The BTR7 is much bigger and chunkier, it feels like a small DAP. It's well made and feels solid, almost to a fault. The buttons are better but the volume control is super slow. The screen is sort of an afterthought, it's not bad but not super useful either. The Qudelix app is better, it's a bit grognardy with all the insane options but it works well.

tl;dr: If you're concerned about price at all just get the Qudelix, the Fiio is good too but more for desktop and maybe car use than pocket. If the Q5 doesn't have enough juice the Fiio has more power and more battery life.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 18:01

NewFatMike: Jun 11, 2015

Super thanks! It�s good to hear hands on experience with both. The Qudilex should be good, I almost certainly won�t use it for 8+ hours a day on the occasions I need it.

# ? Feb 3, 2023 19:19

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 06:42

Arson Daily: Aug 11, 2003

Anyone know about the Kenwood KH-K1000? A guy on CL wants to trade them for my mostly brand new HD600's

# ? Feb 4, 2023 18:24

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Let's Talk Headphones IV: Should I get Beats? Do I need Noise Cancelling?

«‹›405 »